County leaders to rein in labor costs

July 27, 2010

By Warren Kagarise

King County leaders have taken a step to reduce labor costs — or 60 percent of the cash-strapped county’s budget.

The proposed reforms could require county employees to pay more for health and dental benefits, limit inflation-related raises, cut overtime and call for employee layoffs to be based on merit instead of seniority.

County Council members — acting as the Labor Policy Committee — adopted the set of labor reforms in a unanimous decision July 14. The changes could impact as many as 11,000 county employees.

The package could prompt a face-off between county leaders and public employee unions, as the county struggles to contain a $60 million budget deficit next year.

Councilwoman Kathy Lambert, the Issaquah representative on the council, and council Chairman Bob Ferguson spearheaded the effort.

“Labor is the face of King County, and our employees perform many vital and important functions,” Lambert said in a statement. “Our dedicated staff includes doctors, nurses, attorneys, clerks, jail guards, judges, sheriff’s deputies and wastewater workers. These people are assets to the citizens of King County, and their compensation needs to be fair.”

Councilman Reagan Dunn, the other Issaquah-area representative on the nine-member council, has also advocated for labor reform.

“King County labor policy reform is a difficult undertaking, but it is absolutely necessary,” he said in a statement. “Budget sustainability and efficiency will remain out of reach until labor costs are addressed and brought in line with fiscal reality. This is a meaningful step in the right direction.”

Lambert — first elected as a Republican — and Ferguson — first elected as a Democrat — put aside partisan politics to complete the proposal.

“Today’s bipartisan effort demonstrates the kind of leadership we must maintain to keep the county on track despite the significant fiscal challenges we face,” Ferguson said in a statement.

County voters approved a measure in 2008 to make the council, county executive and county assessor offices nonpartisan.

The council hailed the reforms as the first major review of labor policy since King County and Metro merged in 1994. Members approved the reforms a day after County Executive Dow Constantine announced he had frozen his salary and the salaries of about 150 other top officials.

Under the county charter, the executive acts as the county’s lead negotiator in labor talks. The council proposal provides guidelines for Constantine as he enters negotiations with 63 of the county’s 73 bargaining units next year.

The council and labor leaders discussed possible changes at a May summit.

“I am encouraged by the countywide teamwork we are seeing — elected officials, our valued employees and the public — as together we take on the most serious financial challenges that county government has ever faced,” Constantine said in a statement.

County executives freezes salaries

King County Executive Dow Constantine has frozen his salary and those of about 150 top managers, as county officials tackle a $60 million budget gap.

Constantine also eliminated cost-of-living adjustments, and proposed extending the existing hiring freeze by cutting vacant positions. The proposal announced by Constantine on July 13 also limits out-of-state travel for county employees.

“I cannot in good conscience send the council a 2011 budget with drastic cuts to public safety without first leading through example in my office and administration and asking others to do the same,” Constantine said in a statement.

He asked other elected officials — including the assessor, elections director, prosecutor, sheriff and County Council members — to take similar steps.

Some department chiefs offered support for the proposal.

“Elections will do its part to help the county operate as efficiently as possible,” Elections Director Sherril Huff said in a statement. “I’m supporting the executive’s salary initiative.”

Comments

One Response to “County leaders to rein in labor costs”

tiredofcrime on
July 28th, 2010 7:29 am

Isn’t this part of what KC calls the “general fund” (funds that aren’t specifically earmarked and KC can spend at will?). From what I understand, KC also has another fund for items that must go to specifics (i.e. the passed a Flood Control tax levy with no public vote and now those funds go just for that use).

If this is true, the 60% being spent on employees is actually lower if you were to pool all the taxes (incoming dollars to KC). Think Brightwater Sewer, that’s an expensive project and I doubt those dollars are in the “general fund”.

The problem is that KC should have core functions (like Public Safety), earmarked and never part of the general fund, the Council and Dow have failed in their jobs and seem to be playing a political game of “smoke and mirrors” over the years, spending on “pet projects”….like 1.2 million on the recent Noise Study for Magnolia residents. Why is KC bothering with Seattle areas when the Council / Dow can’t even fund Public Safety / Courts in King County. Poor job performance is the reason!

Got something to say?

Before you comment, please note:

These comments are moderated.

Comments should be relevant to the topic at hand and contribute to its discussion.

Personal attacks and/or excessive profanity will not be tolerated and such comments will not be approved.

This is not your personal chat room or forum, so please stay on topic.